Why are there so many Atheists on WP?

Post Reply New Topic

And with estimates of around 4% of the people in the United States and 2.5% of the people in the world that identify themselves as Atheists, the internet is the only reasonable area of discussion on the topic, for many.

I can't blame one that holds that opinion for expressing it loud and clear here; in many areas of the country Christianity is a common discussion point in the workplace, one would hate to think a person could lose a job for expressing an opposing opinion, but a cold shoulder could certainly be the result, and we all know how office "politics" work.

The only place I ever heard anyone mention they were Atheist was in College. In twenty three years of dealing with thousands of people in the public at work and hundreds of Co-workers, no one ever mentioned it. However, Christianity was a common point of conversation through out it all. Come to think of it, more people mentioned atheism in College than they did any other religious belief.

And, rarely did someone mention the "D" word, Democrat. Matter of fact, more was mentioned against liberal policies than for Christian policies, with a ferver almost as strong as any evangelical group of Christians.

People freely discuss religion and politics in the workplace, if 99% of the people are in agreement. College and the Internet are a great place to express all opinions. And a good place to consider opposing ones, where one might never otherwise have that opportunity.

No, No, and No.

It only gets offensive when people resort to ad hominem attacks. Or when you express your thoughts, and somebody comes along and fills your words up with garbage then runs with it, all for the sake of keeping the argument alive. A lot of people in the PPR forum are bad about that.

Ah yes,
for those who would counter "Atheism is a lack of belief" with "X subset of Atheism isn't!" and think their response anything but laughable is about as heart-wrenchingly illogical as it gets.

Last edited by ValentineWiggin on 15 Jun 2011, 7:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

Would anti-theism be a form of atheism, however radical and removed from the majority?

I don't know that it's necessarily removed from the majority of atheists,
merely that equivocation of the two terms
(one being a lack of a belief-state, the other a positive opposition to said belief-state)
is intellectually-dishonest.

Equivocation would be incorrect, but I would suppose that anti-theism would be a subset of atheism.

I would think it rationally the case, yes, and from what I can find it's considered as such.

I personaly always believed that people people with AS are athiests because their early expirences with so called "Christians" were very negative. Well, that's what happend to me. The kids who were very mean and nasty to me at school were sweet and nice in the church. Most Christians I have come across are very judgemental twoards those who are diffrent. Kinda like people who were bitten or growled at by a dog as kids and grow up to be afraid of dogs and resentful of them. It's a learned fear or a learned resentment. Many of the so called Christians I met as a kid were only Christians on Sunday or in a church setting. Many of the so called Christians I have met were very nasty people.

So, a negative experience with pseudo-Christians implies the falsity of Christianity?

I definitely think experiences like that give cause for questioning people - after all, you learn far more about a person from what they DO than what they SAY.

However, I think that oversimplifies atheism. It could be seen, by some, to imply that atheists are simply angry folks who denounce a religion because people from that religion were mean to them. I'd like to think I'm a little more sophisticated than that. I read the bible, I read the book of mormon, I read the literature of several religions, and did research on prominent atheists and made a decision that religion is man-made. A santa for grown-ups. Many will disagree, but it's the conclusion I came to after much research and soul searching.

I dabble in buddhism as a philosophy, but have no interest in religion, organized or otherwise, and it isn't because most christians I've met in the US are similar to how MagicMeerkat has described. It's because I simply do not believe there is such a thing as a god.

My parents are theists, but I've never believed- never encountered evidence, and what NT's might call being "overly-"(~snort~)"logical" is my most prominent trait as an Autist. I have...empathetic? cognitive? inabilities to the point where I can't even tangentially understand the notion of "choosing" one's beliefs, for instance.

I've identified as an atheist since I was SEVEN.

I think, at least, in part, you answered the Op's question. And, provide anecdotal evidence related to research in the lack of teological thinking among some Autistic people.

In the churches I visited when I was young the thing I noticed was evidence of a common connection between everyone, that I couldn't feel a part of. Not having a empathetic connection with others is definitely a different experience in life. It gives others the ability to share sadness, but also joy and contentment. It's been a faucet for me turned on and turned off in different parts of my life. It is that connected feeling with others, and the world in general, that some people feel is the "power of God".

New research into mirror neurons show that some people experience empathy so strong that when they see someone touching someone else they actually feel the touch on their own body as it is viewed. Brain scans can measure the phenomenon.

Some people attribute it as a normal part of life, some people attribute it to God; however evidently it is an evolutionary product as a social animal. There is no doubt in my mind that social animals outside of humans experience the same phenomenon, perhaps stronger. Even strong enough where it may evoke a connection between Horses, Dolphins, and Autistic people that they can't find anywhere else.

Mirror Neurons may not be the only issue at hand; oxytocin has been suggested to be a part of this; a reward in connection that some researchers suggest is deficient in some Autistic people.

The key here as always is all Autistic people are different; some people on this site show strong signs of teological thinking, some don't, but it is evident that we all have emotion, even if it is limited to anger, frustration, or anxiety. If we had no emotion, we would not be able to make any decisions in life.

I'm not so sure that it is common for people to be born without this ability, but perhaps more common for the faucet to get turned off with the stresses of life. About 40% of people that experience PTSD, lose their ability to understand and/or feel complex emotions (alexithymia); the number is about 80% among people with Aspergers. Is it a result of life or a result of genetics; both could play a part in Autism.

Ah yes, the not real christians line..

And the 9/11 hijackers weren't real muslims..

Stalin wasn't a real communist..

The witch hunters weren't real christians either, right?

and any biblical passage which mandates bigotry, genocide, homophobia, racism, sexism, slavery, etc etc are just allegorical too.

do you actually swallow this slippery crap? Ugh. *facepalm*

Look, my good fellow:

You have a choice: Either everyone who calls himself [let us say] a Liberal, or is labelled a Liberal by others IS ipso facto a "Liberal" and it is legitimate to see his actions ass reflecting on ALL persons identified by themselves or others as "Liberals"

or else

"Liberal" is defined on the basis of specific attitudes and behaviors, and one may NOT be a Liberal though so self-described and one may BE a Liberal even if one identifies oneself as Conservative - soi that if General Topo, interviewed after his troops opened fire on the strikers, declares himself a Liberal we say unh unh, no way, mon.

In the specific case of Christianity, Church councils and Christ him,self have clearly stated that not everyone claiming the name IS a follower of Christ.

I urge you to think more and recite slogans less.

that would mean only a fraction of the "christians" are real christians.

Until the categories get settled out - something that doesn't happen in this life - we're stuck with accepting as Christian those who claim the name, even when they are engaged in decidedly nonChristian behaviors.

(edit: Excommunication being the rare exception. But that's not a sentence you or I or any other person in the pew or reading the morning news can pass; and even it does not place the person outside of the Church as such.)